DOI: 10.51824/978-975-17-4794-5.08 THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN TURKEY (1908-1980) Behçet Kemal YEŞİLBURSA

(1)

THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN TURKEY (1908-1980)

Behçet Kemal YEŞİLBURSA^*

ABSTRACT

Political parties started to be established in Turkey in the second half of the 19th century with the formation of societies aiming at the reform of the Ottoman Empire. They reaped the fruits of their labour in 1908 when the Young Turk Revolution replaced the Sultan with the Committee of Union and Progress, which disbanded itself on the defeat of the Empire in 1918. Following the proclamation of the Re- public in 1923, new parties started to be formed, but experiments with a multi-party system were soon abandoned in favour of a one-party system. From 1930 until the end of the Second World War, the Pe- ople’s Republican Party (PRP) was the only political party. It was not until after the Second World War that Turkey reverted to a multi- party system. The most significant new parties were the Democrat Party (DP), formed on 7 January 1946, and the Nation Party (NP) formed on 20 July 1948, after a spilt in the DP. However, as a result of the coup of 27 May 1960, the military Government, the Committee of National Union (CNU), declared its intentions of seizing power, restoring rights and privileges infringed by the Democrats, and drawing up a new Constitution, to be brought into being by a free election. In January 1961, the CNU relaxed its initial ban on all political activities, and within a month eleven new parties were formed, in addition to the already established parties. The most important of the new parties

* Prof. Dr., Bursa Uludag University. E-Mail: bkyesilbursa@uludag.edu.tr

(2)

were the Justice Party (JP) and New Turkey Party (NTP), which competed with each other for the DP’s electoral support. In the general election of October 1961, the PRP’s failure to win an absolute majority resulted in four coalition Governments, until the elections in October 1965. The General Election of October 1965 returned the JP to power with a clear, overall majority. The poor performance of almost all the minor parties led to the virtual establishment of a two-party system.

Neither the JP nor the PRP were, however, completely united. With the General Election of October 1969, the JP was returned to office, although with a reduced share of the vote. The position of the minor parties declined still further. Demirel resigned on 12 March 1971 after receiving a memorandum from the Armed Forces Commanders threatening to take direct control of the country. Thus, an “above-party”

Government was formed to restore law and order and carry out reforms in keeping with the policies and ideals of Atatürk. In March 1973, the “above-party” Melen Government resigned, partly because Parliament rejected the military candidate, General Gürler, whom it had supported in the Presidential Elections of March-April 1973. This rejection represented the determination of Parliament not to accept the dictates of the Armed Forces. On 15 April, a new “above party”

government was formed by Naim Talu. The fundamental dilemma of Turkish politics was that democracy impeded reform. The democratic process tended to return conservative parties (such as the Democrat and Justice Parties) to power, with the support of the traditional Isla- mic sectors of Turkish society, which in turn resulted in the frustration of the demands for reform of a powerful minority, including the intellectuals, the Armed Forces and the newly purged PRP. In the last half of the 20^th century, this conflict resulted in two periods of military intervention, two direct and one indirect, to secure reform and to qu- ell the disorder resulting from the lack of it. This paper examines the historical development of the Turkish party system, and the factors which have contributed to breakdowns in multiparty democracy.

(3)

Keywords: Political Parties, Democracy, Governments, Opposi- tion, Turkey.

(4)

TÜRKİYE’DE SİYASİ PARTİLERİN KURULUŞU VE GELİŞİMİ (1908-1980)

ÖZET

Türkiye'de siyasi partiler 19. yüzyılın ikinci yarısında Osmanlı İm- paratorluğu’nda reform amaçlayan cemiyetler tarafından kurulmaya başladı. Bu çabalar, 1908’de İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti’nin impara- torluğun gerçek yöneticisi olarak padişahın yerini almasıyla başarılı oldu. 1923’de bir Cumhuriyetin ilanından sonra yeni partiler kurulmaya başladı, ancak çok partili bir sistem tek parti sistemi lehine terk edildi. 1930’dan İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın sonuna kadar Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP) tek siyasi partiydi. İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra, Türkiye çok partili bir sisteme geri döndü. En önemli yeni partiler, 7 Ocak 1946’da kurulan Demokrat Parti (DP) ve DP bölündükten sonra 20 Temmuz 1948’de kurulan Millet Partisi (MP) idi. Türkiye, 1950’lerdeki Demokrat Parti iktidarından sonra; 1960-1961 arasında doğrudan, 1971-1973 arasında da “teknokrat” hükümet formülü al- tında dolaylı bir askeri yönetim dönemi yaşamıştır. 27 Mayıs 1960’da ordu iktidarı ele geçirdi. Ancak Milli Birlik Komitesi yeni bir anayasa ve özgür bir seçimle siyasi hayata kısa sürede dönmeyi amaçladı. Do- layısıyla Ocak 1961’de tüm siyasi faaliyetlere ilişkin ilk yasağını yumu- şattı ve bir ay içinde var olan partilere ek olarak on bir yeni parti kuruldu. Yeni partilerin en önemlisi, DP’nin seçim desteği için birbiriyle yarışan Adalet Partisi (JP) ve Yeni Türkiye Partisi (NTP) oldu. Ekim 1961’de yapılan genel seçimlerde CHP’nin mutlak çoğunluğu kazana- maması üzerine Ekim 1965’teki seçimlere kadar dört koalisyon hükü- meti kuruldu. Ekim 1965’de yapılan genel seçimlerde Adalet Partisi iktidara geldi. Küçük partilerin zayıf performansı neredeyse iki partili bir sistemin sanal olarak kurulmasına yol açtı. Ekim 1969’da yapılan genel seçimlerde daha az oy almasına rağmen AP’si iktidara tekrar geldi. Küçük partilerin oyları ve pozisyonları daha da düştü. Demirel, reformlar yapılmadığı takdirde ülkenin doğrudan kontrolünü ele ge-

(5)

çirme tehdidinde bulunan Silahlı Kuvvetlerden aldığı muhtıra üze- rine, 12 Mart 1971’de istifa etti. Mart 1973’teki Cumhurbaşkanlığı se- çimlerinden sonra Ferit Melen Hükümeti, desteklediği Cumhurbaş- kanı adayı General Gürler’in Meclis tarafından reddedilmesi üzerine, istifa etti. Yeni hükümet 15 Nisan 1973’de Naim Talu tarafından kuruldu. Demirel ve Ecevit artık normal demokratik koşullara ve parti hükümetine dönüşün bir öncelik olması gerektiğine inanıyordu. Ni- tekim Ekim 1973’de genel seçimler yapıldı.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Siyasi Partiler, Demokrasi, Hükümetler, Mu- halefet, Turkey.

(6)

1. Introduction

Political parties started to develop in Turkey in the second half of the nineteenth century with the establishment of societies aiming at the reform of the Ottoman Empire. Their efforts succeeded in 1908 when the Young Turk Revolution replaced the Sultan as the real ruler of the Empire with the Committee of Union and Progress, which disbanded itself on the defeat of the Empire in 1918.¹ After the proclamation of a Republic in 1923, new parties started to be formed, but the experiment with a multi-party system was soon abandoned in favour of a one-party system. From 1930 until the end of the Second World War, the People’s Republican Party (PRP) was the only political party. Its support, together with that of the army, enabled Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to impose westernizing reforms on Turkey between 1923 and 1938.²

After the Second World War, Turkey reverted to a multi-party system. The most significant new parties were the Democrat Party (DP), formed on 7 January 1946, and the Nation Party (NP) formed on 20 July 1948, after a spilt in the DP.³ The PRP Government gave way to pressure for electoral reforms to rule out corruption, and these reforms, together with dissatisfaction with decades of PRP rule, brought the DP to power with a landslide victory in the elections of 1950.

When the DP Government’s initial popularity declined, in the mid- 1950s, it attempted to consolidate its rule by introducing repressive measures to weaken opposition parties and to restrict political liberties in the country as a whole. Its illiberal measures caused a split within

1 Feroz Ahmad, The Making of Modern Turkey, Routledge, London, 1993, p. 31-51.

2 The National Archives, United Kingdom, (here after TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973.

3 Tevfik Çavdar, Türkiye’nin Demokrasi Tarihi (1839-1950), İmge Kitabevi, Ankara, 2008, p. 453-466.

(7)

the party itself. Its attack on the position of opposition parties culminated in its suspension of all party activities in April 1960, an action which in turn provoked a military coup on 27 May 1960.⁴

The military Government, the Committee of National Union (CNU), declared its intention, on seizing power, of restoring rights and privileges infringed by the Democrats and drawing up a new Constitution, to be brought into being by a free election. Its concern that the DP should not be returned to power led to the dissolution and banning of the DP by the CNU, and the imprisonment of many DP members. In January 1961, the CNU relaxed its initial ban on all political activities, and within a month eleven new parties were formed, in addition to the established parties. The most important of the new parties were the Justice Party (JP) and New Turkey Party (NTP), which competed with each other for the DP’s electoral support. In July 1961, a national referendum approved the CNU’s proposed new constitution and the promised elections were held in the following Octo- ber.⁵

In the general election of October 1961, the PRP failure to win an absolute majority resulted in four coalition Governments up until the elections in October 1965. The first was a difficult mixture of the PRP and its biggest rival, the JP, which soon resulted in Parliamentary and Governmental deadlock. This coalition lasted until 31 May 1962. In the second coalition the PRP was supported by two minor parties, the Republican Peasants Nation Party (RPNP) and the New Turkey Party (NTP). It was hounded by differences of opinion on the question of state versus private enterprise in the economic sector, and by internal divisions within the parties which formed it. The two minor parties hurriedly abandoned the coalition in November 1963 when it became apparent that their association with a PRP dominated coalition had

4 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 Au- gust 1973. Feroz Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye (1945-1980), Hil Yayınları, İstanbul, 2010, p. 55-133.

5 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 Au- gust 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 188-222.

(8)

cost them support in local elections. In the third coalition, the PRP Government was dependent on the support of some Independents in Parliament. This Government was toppled in February 1965 when the new leader of the JP, Süleyman Demirel, led most other opposition parties in a “national opposition” to reject the budget law. The fourth coalition, led by the JP, with the support of the NTP, RPNP and NP, was dominated by the prospect of elections in the autumn of 1965.

The most significant event of the election campaigns was the announ- cement that the PRP was a “left-of-centre” party, which cost it a considerable number of moderate votes.⁶

The General Election of October 1965 returned the JP to power with a comfortable, overall majority. The poor performance of almost all the minor parties led to the virtual establishment of a two-party system. However, neither the JP nor the PRP were completely united.

In the JP, there was discord between the moderate conservatives, led by the Prime Minister, Demirel, and the right-wing extremists led by Saadettin Bilgiç, which manifested itself in struggles for control of the party at JP Congresses. In the PRP, the adoption of the “left-of-centre”

policy led to dissension which resulted in the withdrawal from the party of forty- eight moderate Deputies and Senators in April 1967, and their establishment of the Reliance Party (RP), under Professor Turhan Feyzioğlu, in May 1967. This split in the PRP helped the JP to maintain its electoral position during its first term of office, despite the fact that it ended the term on a note of crisis over demands for the full restoration of the political rights of former DP members.⁷

The General Election of October 1969 returned the JP to office, although with a reduced share of the vote. The position of the minor parties declined still further, with the JP and PRP accounting for 88.7% of the parliamentary seats. The PRP continued to be divided

(9)

between the extreme left-wing supporters of its Secretary General, Bü- lent Ecevit, and its more moderate members, with the Chairman, İs- met İnönü, trying unsuccessfully to reconcile the two factions. Divisi- ons in the JP between moderates and right-wingers came to a head with the expulsion from the party in June 1970 of Bilgiç and twenty- five of his followers, and in the establishment in December 1970 of the right-wing Democratic Party. These events dealt a serious blow to the position of the Demirel Government, which was additionally faced with charges of corruption, serious economic difficulties and extremist violence.⁸

Demirel resigned on 12 March 1971 after receiving a memorandum from the Armed Forces Commanders threatening to take direct control of the country unless a new “above-party” Government was formed to restore law and order and carry out reforms in keeping with the policies and ideals of Atatürk. Up until 1973, the time of the report, three successive administrations struggled to comply with the Army’s demands. Law and order were restored by the use of martial law and by the repression of left-wing activities. However, progress on reform was slow, because the conservative JP, with its majority in the Assembly, was in a position to obstruct reform legislation. The first

“above-party” Prime Minister, Nihat Erim, resigned over the difficulties of getting reforms through the Assembly in April 1972. The subsequent Government of Ferit Melen succumbed to the realities of democracy and acquiesced in the wishes of the majority JP.⁹

During the period of the “above-party” Government, the PRP un- derwent a serious split between the supporters of Inönü and those of Ecevit. Inönü and the conservatives in the PRP supported the appointment to the premiership of Nihat Erim, but Ecevit refused to co- operate and resigned as Secretary-General. When an Extraordinary

(10)

Party Congress in May 1972 showed that Ecevit had the support of the majority, Inönü resigned and was replaced as Chairman by Ecevit.

The split was completed in November 1972, when Inönü and thirty- three other PRP Parliamentarians withdrew from the party in protest at Ecevit’s decision to withdraw the five PRP Ministers from the Melen Government. Ecevit later claimed that these changes purified the party and provided it with a coherent policy of opposition as a radical alternative to the conservative JP. The Foreign Office noted that “its electoral prospects, however, remain poor in the foreseeable future”.¹⁰

In March 1973, the elements which had resigned from the PRP in the latter half of 1972 amalgamated with the National Reliance Party to form the Republican Reliance Party (RRP). On 15 April, the RRP joined the JP in a coalition Government under Prime Minister Naim Talu. The “above-party” Melen Government had resigned, partly because Parliament rejected the military candidate, General Gürler, whom it supported, in the Presidential Elections of March-April 1973.

This rejection represented the determination of Parliament not to accept the dictates of the Armed Forces.¹¹

The Foreign Office noted that the basic dilemma of Turkish politics was that democracy hindered reform. The democratic process ge- nerally returned to power conservative parties (such as the Democrat and Justice Parties), with the support of the traditional Islamic sectors of Turkish society, which in turn resulted in the frustration of the demands for reform of a powerful minority, including the intellectuals, the Armed Forces and the recently purged PRP. This conflict resulted in two periods of military intervention since the Second World War:

one direct and one indirect, to secure reform and to stifle the disorder resulting from the lack of it. Unless the JP had learned that no Turkish

10 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 353-398.

(11)

Government could ignore the wishes of the powerful reforming minority without inviting the risk of intervention by the Armed Forces, which constituted part of that minority, and of civil disorder, the prospects for peaceful and democratic changes were poor. This paper examines the historical development of the Turkish party system, and the factors which have contributed to breakdowns in multiparty democracy.¹²

2. The Constitutional Periods of the Ottoman Empire 2.1. The pressure for constitutional reform

The Ottoman Empire had long experience of pressure groups, but it was not until the last part of the 19th century that any organised political societies or opposition appeared. Turkey was not isolated from European influences during this period, and the spread of nationalism, liberalism and democracy among its educated elite brewed discontent with Turkey’s antiquated and autocratic system of government. In 1865, the Young Turk Society was formed with the aim of transforming the Ottoman Sultan into a constitutional monarch. Its agitation appeared to have been successful in 1876 when Sultan Ab- dulhamid proclaimed a constitution providing for a Parliament, but the constitution was deferred only two years later and the Parliament suspended. Pressure for reform continued, however, and in 1889 an Association for Ottoman Union and Progress was formed by four me- dical students. It grew rapidly and eventually developed close contacts with the Ottoman Freedom Society, founded in 1906 by a group of army officers. The two bodies co-operated in the revolution of 23 July 1908, which forced the restoration of the 1876 Constitution.¹³

12 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. The third intervention was that of 12 September 1980.

13 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Çavdar, Türkiye’nin Demokrasi Tarihi (1839-1950), p. 21-101.

(12)

2.2. The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) Government (1908-1918)

The two societies responsible for the 1908 Revolution established the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) and replaced the Sultan as the real rulers of the Empire. They governed from 1908 to 1918 (except for a short period in 1912), at first as a secret society and then as a political party (12 April 1909). After an initial period of relative political freedom, the CUP became as autocratic as the Sultan, repres- sing in 1909 the Liberal (Ahrar) Party, which had won one seat in the elections of 1908. No effective opposition to the CUP developed until November 1911, when dissidents from the CUP merged with other opposition forces to form the Liberal Union. In April 1912, the CUP was again successful in what is thought to be a rigged general election, but was ousted by the military conspiracy of a group called the “Savi- our Officers”. The CUP regained power in January 1913 after a vio- lent coup, and thereafter ruled the Empire until the end of the First World War, when it disbanded itself (October 1918).¹⁴

3. The Republic

3.1. The formation of the Republic

The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, and subsequent Allied and Greek intervention in Turkey provoked the creation of a number of nationalist resistance organisations. These were registered as societies under Ottoman law and eventually all combined in the “Associa- tion for the Defence of the Rights of Anatolia and Rumelia” which was led by the Inspector-General of the Ninth (Ottoman) Army, Mustafa Kemal. These nationalist groups formed the Grand National Assembly (GNA) in Ankara in March 1920 and, after the defeat of the Greeks

14 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Tarık Zafer Tunaya, Türkiye’de Siyasal Partiler, Cilt-III: İttihat ve Terakki, Bir Çağın, Bir Kuşağın, Bir Partinin Tarihi, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2000, passim. Sina Akşin, Jön Türkler ve İttihat ve Terakki, İmge Kitabevi, Ankara, 2017, passim.

(13)

and the forces of the Sultan’s Government in Istanbul, the GNA proclaimed the Republic of Turkey, under the Presidency of Mustafa Ke- mal (Atatürk), on 29 October 1923. On 20 April 1924, the GNA adopted a new Constitution providing for a single chamber Parliament to be elected on a system of indirect voting every four years.¹⁵

3.2. The formation of the People’s Republican Party

In August 1923, the Association for the Defence of the Rights of Anatolia and Rumelia was transformed into a political party named the “People’s Party”.¹⁶ Renamed the “People’s Republican Party”

(PRP) in November 1924, the party was from the start associated with Atatürk’s programme of reform. In 1931, his six principles (called the

“Six Arrows”) of republicanism, nationalism, populism, secularism, statism¹⁷ and reformism were incorporated in the party's programme.¹⁸

3.3. Opposition to Atatürk and the PRP

Opposition to Atatürk and the PRP came from conservative opponents of the reforms, in particular secularism, and liberal opponents of Atatürk’s apparently autocratic tendencies. Two early opposition

15 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Rıdvan Akın, Türk Siyasal Tarihi (1908-2000), Oniki Levha Yayınevi, İstanbul, 2015, p. 97-147, 271-306.

16 Hakkı Uyar, 100 Soruda Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Tarihi, 1923-2012, Anka Ajans, Ankara, 2012, passim.

17 Statism was defined by Atatürk in his manifesto of 20 April 1931 in these words:

“Although considering private work and activity a basic idea, it is one of our main principles to Interest the State actively in matters where the general and vital Interests of the nation are in question, especially in the economic field, in order to lead the nation and the country to prosperity in as short a time as possible”. He subsequently stressed that he did not intend to collectivise the economy or establish state monopo- lies, but only to initiate state projects in fields which were of vital concern to the nation, and in which private capital was Incapable, inactive or dilatory. See (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973.

18 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Sina Akşin, (Yay. Yön.), Türkiye Tarihi 4: Çağdaş Türkiye (1908-1980), Cem Yayınevi, İstanbul 2002, p. 130-133.

(14)

parties, the Progressive Republican Party¹⁹, formed in November 1924, and the Turkish Communist Party (TKP), formed in 1920 were suppressed in June and August 1925 respectively under a “Law for the Maintenance of Order” which was prompted by a Kurdish revolt in Eastern Anatolia. Consequently, the PRP was the only party to par- ticipate in the elections of September 1927. However, with the lapse of the law in 1929, new political parties were formed, initially with the encouragement of Atatürk. The Free Republican Party²⁰, formed in August 1930, gained much support for its criticisms of Government economic policy and for its backing of free enterprise, but the violence of the religious reactionaries among its supporters led Atatürk to withdraw his encouragement of the party and it dissolved itself in No- vember 1930.²¹ At the same time two other recently-formed parties, a

“Popular Republican Party”, and a “Workers and Peasants Party”, were closed down by the Government.²²

From 1930 until the end of the Second World War, the existence of political parties other than the PRP was banned. In 1936, the PRP became integrated with the Government, when it was decided that the Chairman of the party should ipso facto be President of the Republic.

In February 1937, the party’s “Six Arrows” were incorporated into the Constitution.²³ When Atatürk died in November 1938, he was succeeded as President of the Republic and Chairman of the PRP by İsmet

19 Ahmet Yeşil, Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası, Cedid Neşriyat, Ankara 2002, passim.

20 Cemil Koçak, Belgelerle İktidar ve Serbest Cumhuriyet Fırkası, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2014, passim.

21 Akşin, Türkiye Tarihi 4, p. 147-149.

22 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmet Demirel, Birinci Meclis’te Muhalefet, İkinci Grup, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2015.

23 Hakkı Uyar, Tek Parti Dönemi ve Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, Boyut Kitapları, İs- tanbul, 2012, passim.

(15)

İnönü, who created an “Independent Group” within the PRP to rep- resent an opposition. However, the Second World War prevented any progress towards a multi-party democracy.²⁴

4. The start of multi-party democracy (1945-1950)

After the Second World War, internal pressures to liberate the regime were increased by the victory of the Western democracies and Turkey's accession to the United Nations. İnonu relaxed the Govern- ment’s ban on the existence of political parties other than the PRP, and in July 1945, the National Resurgence Party formed. The first significant opposition party was the Democrat Party (DP), founded on 7 January 1946, and two years later dissidence within its ranks led to the formation of the Nation Party (NP) on 20 July 1948.²⁵

4.1. The Democrat Party

The DP was founded by four dissident members of the PRP, Ad- nan Menderes, Refik Koraltan, Mehmet Fuad Köprülü and Celal Ba- yar, an ex-Prime Minister, with the promise of increasing the share of private enterprise in the economy and of speeding Turkey’s progress towards full democracy. It gained support rapidly, but its electoral success was initially limited, partly because it was caught unprepared by a PRP tactical move bringing forward elections from 1947 to 1946, and partly because of the PRP Government’s fixing of the election results. Nonetheless the DP won 61 out of 454 seats in the 1946 elections.

With Atatürk’s Six Arrows embedded in the Turkish Constitution, it was not possible for the DP to differ radically from the PRP. However, it still benefited from discontentment with decades of PRP rule, which was largely responsible for linking together under the DP banner bu-

24 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Zürcher, Erik J., Turkey: A Modern History, I. B. Tauris, London, 1994, p. 173-214.

25 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Kemal H. Karpat, Türk Demokrasi Tarihi, İmge Kitabevi, Ankara, 2008, p. 241-356.

(16)

sinessmen, landowners, villagers, labourers, tradition loving conservatives, and even some of the military, bureaucracy and intellectuals, in its landslide victory in the 1950 elections.²⁶

4.2. The Nation Party

The NP was formed by a number of conservative and nationalist dissidents from the DP. Like the DP, it opposed étatism, but accused the DP of acting in collusion with the PRP. It was an anti-secularist party which attracted support from religious reactionaries; Islam was no longer the established faith as from 1928, but the majority of the population were still followers.²⁷

4.3. The People’s Republican Party

The decision by President İnönü to allow multi-party democracy was followed by the dissolution of the “Independent Group” opposition within the PRP. Opposition parties and pressure groups forced the PRP to make concessions on its policy of secularism and to moderate its policy of étatism in deference to the business community. DP pressures for the liberalisation of government found support among young liberals In the PRP, led by Nihat Erim, it was pressure from the liberal wing which led to the removal from office in September 1947, of the authoritarian wing of the PRP led by Recep Peker. Public and opposition criticism after the rigged 1946 elections pressurised the PRP Government and led to the introduction, in February 1950, of a new electoral law, providing for a system of simple majority in elections and transferring the supervision of elections from the Civil Ser- vice, a PRP stronghold, to the judiciary. There followed the remar- kably free elections of May 1950, which resulted in 69 seats for the PRP, 1 for the NP and 408 for the DP. Celal Bayar was elected Presi- dent, and İnönü became leader of the opposition. Thus the PRP,

26 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Akın, Türk Siyasal Tarihi, p. 331-362.

(17)

which had governed the Republic for 27 years, set up the conditions for a free election, then acquiesced in its own defeat.²⁸

5. The Democrat Party Government (1950-1960) 5.1. Consolidation of DP rule

The formation of the DP in 1946 and its victory in 1950 radically altered the political situation in Turkey. For the first time, the electorate became a force to be reckoned with. Moreover, as the two main parties sought to build up their electoral support it became clear that a divergence was developing between the views of the Army and those of civilian governments carrying out a popular mandate. After the 1950 elections the DP consequently sought and received guarantees from the Chief of the General Staff respecting their right to govern.

Once convinced that the PRP and its allies (members of the civil ser- vice, the Armed Forces, the Press, the universities, and the professio- nal class, who later came to be known as the “Sound Forces”) would respect the election result, the DP Government began to concentrate on consolidating its position, especially among the peasants. Concessi- ons were made on religion and in the economic development programme, which devoted particular attention to agriculture and to the expansion of the national road network. The DP undoubtedly gained much popularity in the early 1950’s by these and similar measures.²⁹

Despite its success, from 1953 onwards the DP Government sought to weaken the opposition. In July 1953, the Nation Party was first suspended for allegedly exploiting religious feeling for its own ends, and then, in January 1954, dissolved under a “National Security Law”.

In June 1953 offensive criticism of cabinet members became punis- hable by law and in December 1953, much PRP property was confis- cated on the grounds that it had been bought with public funds. In the General Election of May 1954, the DP won 503 seats out of a total

(18)

of 541, with 58 per cent of the total votes cast. Although the PRP won 35 per cent of the votes, its number of Parliamentary seats fell to 31, an anomaly produced by the list-system of voting used. The Nation Party, reconstituted as the Republican National Party (RNP), under the leadership of Osman Bölükbaşı, won 5 seats with 5 per cent of the votes.³⁰

5.2. Disagreements within the DP and the formation of the Freedom Party

The DP’s success in the 1954 elections strengthened the personal control of the Prime Minister, Adnan Menderes. Subsequent illiberal and undemocratic measures, coupled with a worsening economic situation, alienated many of his supporters. Nineteen liberal dissidents in the DP rebelled against a repressive Press Law, nine of whom were expelled by the DP congress in October 1955. The other ten resigned and in December 1955 formed the Freedom Party (FP), taking over the liberal policies abandoned by Menderes and the DP. Further opposition from within the DP forced the Prime Minister to form a new Government in December 1955. Throughout 1956, a number of Ca- binet Ministers resigned in protest at Menderes’ autocratic tendencies but although they were joined by Fuad Köprülü, one of the four founder members of the DP, they did not carry sufficient strength within the party to challenge Menderes’ position.³¹

5.3. The culmination of repression

As support for the DP Government dwindled, so restrictions on political liberty were increased. The freedom of the press was attacked by increasingly severe laws in 1954, 1956 and 1960; the right of public

30 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 55-102. Hakkı Uyar, De- mokrat Parti İktidarında CHP, 1950-1960, Doğan Kitap, İstanbul, 2017.

(19)

assembly was restricted; the immunity to political pressure of civil ser- vants, judges and university teachers was destroyed; opposition politicians, such as Kasım Gülek, the PRP’s Secretary-General, and Osman Bölükbaşı, the leader of the RNP, were imprisoned. In September 1957, when there seemed a fair chance that the PRP, RNP and FP might defeat the DP in the General Election of the following month by forming an electoral alliance, this right was arbitrarily and thoro- ughly suppressed.³² The DP won the election but polled only 7 per cent more of the total vote than the PRP. Owing to the simple majority system, however, the DP won 424 seats to the PRP’s 178, and the RNP and FP with 11 per cent of the votes between them were reduced to four seats each. These discouraging results for the minor parties led, in November 1958, to the amalgamation of the FP with the PRP. The RNP absorbed the obsolescent Peasant’s Party, which had been formed in May 1952, and named itself the Republican Peasant Nation Party (RPNP).³³

After the 1957 elections, the DP Government increased its repressive measures still further, harassing İnönü, the veteran leader of the PRP. Finally, in April 1960, it suspended all party activities and set up a wholly partisan committee to investigate what were described as the

“subversive and illegal activities” of the PRP. Martial law was declared shortly afterwards. The DP's actions had, however, alienated the Ar- med Forces, and on 27 May 1960, their long planned intervention took place.³⁴

The leaders of the coup formed a “Committee of National Union”

(CNU) under the Presidency of General Cemal Gürsel, who had reti-

32 Legislation was passed which ordained that every party had to present a list of candidates in every vilayet in which it had a party organisation. No one could be a candidate for two parties. Nor could anyone be included in any party’s list who had recently resigned from another party.

(20)

red in May 1960 in protest against the DP’s attempts to close all constitutional channels of change and maintain itself in power by the use of the rule of law and the Armed Forces. A largely civilian Govern- ment, subordinate to the CNU, was also set up. All political activities were prohibited and party organisations below district level were closed down. The DP was eventually dissolved and banned in September 1960.³⁵

6. The period of military rule (May 1960-October 1961)

6.1. The fortunes of the DP and PRP under the military government

When it took power, the military government’s declared intention was to restore rights and privileges, draw up a new Constitution and bring it into existence by means of a free election, without allowing a return to power by the DP. When the DP proved sufficiently well organised to survive, the military government proceeded to eliminate it as a mass party. A large number of former DP politicians were imprisoned and there was a general persecution of party members before the promised elections of October 1961. This policy culminated in the execution of Adnan Menderes and two of his colleagues shortly before the elections.³⁶

The PRP did not benefit as much as might have been expected from the downfall of the DP. It was largely in sympathy with the 1960 Revolution and supported the subsequent actions of the CNU. As a result, the electorate associated it with unpopular measures taken by the CNU and saw the Revolution as an attempt to restore the PRP to power by force.³⁷ The PRP’s electoral support was further diminished by the Government’s decision on 13 January 1961 to relax its ban on

(21)

political activities and to allow the formation of new parties. Eleven new parties were registered by 3 February although few of them only existed in name.³⁸

6.2. The new parties: the Justice Party, the New Turkey Party and the Turkish Labour Party

The two most important new parties were the Justice Party (JP)³⁹ and New Turkey Party (NTP). The JP was founded on 11 February by a coalition of former members of the DP and retired Army officers, brought together by opposition to the PRP. It was led by ex-General Ragıp Gümüşpala who had been made Chief of General Staff after the Revolution, but was retired by the CNU in August 1960. The NTP was formed on 13 February by former members of the Freedom Party under the leadership of Ekrem Alican. The two parties immediately began to compete for the DP's provincial organisation and for the DP vote among peasants and businessmen. The JP made louder claims than the NTP to be the DP’s successor, and its activities and attitude to the Revolution led to arrests and warnings by General Gürsel.

These, however, contributed to its success. The Turkish Labour Party (TLP)⁴⁰ was also founded in February 1961. Although formed by trade’s unionists its support came less from industrial workers, who were a small minority of the electorate, than from leftist intellectuals, some of them Marxists, which led to accusations that the TLP was a Communist front.⁴¹

39 Tanel Demirel, Adalet Partisi, İdeoloji ve Politika, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2017, passim.

40 Mehmet Ali Aybar, Türkiye İşçi Partisi Tarihi, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2014, passim.

(22)

6.3. The resumption of political activities

On 1 April 1961, the remaining restrictions on political activities were further relaxed to allow the parties to rally support for, or oppo- sition to, the military government’s proposed new constitution in a national referendum on 9 July. The drafters of the constitution had sought to provide an adequate system of checks and balances to pre- vent arbitrary behaviour by future governments. The constitution provided for a Parliament of two chambers, the Assembly and the Se- nate, to be elected by a system of proportional representation⁴² in place of the simple majority system which had been used since 1950.

Elections would be held under the supervision of the newly-created Constitutional Court, which would also supervise the activities of political parties and ensure that they did not act out of line with the principles of the Republic. The PRP, RPNP and NTP all campaigned for a “yes” vote for this Constitution, but the JP adopted an equivocal position and was able to identify itself with the large “no” vote (38.3 per cent) which revealed the extent of opposition to the Revolution. The JP nevertheless signed a joint party declaration on 5 September con- demning the DP and justifying the intervention of the military. The only party leader not to sign the declaration was Osman Bölükbaşı of the RPNP, who had always tended to vote against any Government or majority decision on principle. The RPNP had at first attracted some former Democrats, but could not compete with the JP and the NTP in attracting serving DP members.⁴³

42 A list system of proportional representation, based on the “highest average” rule, was adopted, but changed in 1965 to another list system of proportional representation, usually known as “greatest remainder”.

(23)

7. The return to civilian Government: PRP-dominated Coalitions (1961-65)

7.1. PRP and JP Coalition Government (October 1961 - May 1962)

In the General Election of 15 October 1961, the PRP failed to win an absolute majority and the balance between it and its nearest rival, the JP, was held by two minor parties, the RPNP and the NTP, whose position had benefitted from the introduction of proportional representation. These two parties refused to co-operate with the PRP, and eventually, despite great differences of opinion and personalities, the JP, which had won an absolute majority in the Senate, was persuaded to support a PRP-dominated coalition. Although an uneasy compromise brought about by mutual fears of renewed military intervention, the coalition re-established a civilian Government. Both Government and Parliament, however, soon reached deadlock. The JP’s economic liberalism and its proposal to release the jailed Democrats conflicted with the Republicans’ statist views and irritated the military, who were proving sensitive to any action likely to erode the achievements of the Revolution. These factors and lack of progress on social and economic reform led to an attempted military coup on 22 February 1962. This failed, but the continued deadlock on issues such as the proposals for an amnesty for imprisoned Democrats led to the Government’s resignation on 31 May 1962.⁴⁴

7.2. Coalition of the PRP, RPNP and NTP, (June 1962 - December 1963) and the position of the JP in opposition

After long negotiations, which largely focused on the question of étatism and private enterprise, İnönü, leader of the PRP, formed a new coalition of the PRP, RPNP and NTP on 25 June 1962. This coalition was again troubled by splits within the constituent parties as well

44 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 263-285. Hakkı Uyar, İki Darbe Arasında CHP, 1960-1971, Doğan Kitap, İstanbul, 2017, passim.

(24)

as between them. The RPNP had been divided shortly before the formation of the new Government by the resignation on 30 March, of its leader Osman Bölükbaşı with twenty-nine other right-wing members of the party, who formed the Nation Party under his leadership. Soon after the formation of the coalition, a dispute arose between Professor Turhan Feyzioğlu of the PRP and Ekrem Alican of the NTP who rep- resented the opposing trends of étatism and laissez faire policies. The NTP itself was troubled by a loss of supporters to the JP, and internal disagreements between the former Freedom Party members of the NTP, who supported Alican; and the former members of the DP, who saw the JP as their true home. There were also divisions within the PRP, where the left-wing’s challenge to Inönü’s leadership of the party, and its pressure for faster progress on reforms, resulted in the suspension from the party of its leaders, Kasım Gülek and Nihat Erim.⁴⁵

The JP, now in opposition, was also dogged by internal disagreements, largely over the issue of an amnesty for imprisoned Democrats.

Although the party was less than satisfied with the amnesty measures introduced by the Government in October 1962 and February 1963, the hostility of the armed forces led to its extremist leaders moderating their demands. The popularity of the JP was steadily increasing at this time, and in local elections held in November 1963 it won 46% of the vote, largely at the expense of the NTP and RPNP, who had suffered from their association with the PRP. As a result, hoping to regain their lost popularity, the minor parties hurriedly abandoned the coalition, but to no avail. The Government, therefore, resigned on 2 December 1963.⁴⁶

(25)

7.3. Coalition of the PRP and Independents, (January 1964 - February 1965) and internal developments in the PRP and JP

The second failure of a PRP dominated coalition led to the JP being invited to form a Government, putting an end to the belief that the Armed Forces would never tolerate a JP Government. The JP's refusal to compromise over the amnesty question prevented its leader, Gümüşpala, from accepting, and so the PRP were asked to form another Government. The RPNP and NTP refused to join another coalition with the PRP, and so İnönü had to rely on the support of some Independents to form his Government. The NTP gave the Govern- ment its support in Parliament, but it was a divided and declining party which was losing members to the JP. The RPNP supported the JP in opposition to the Government, and there was a steady defection to the JP of the Independents who had joined the coalition. As a result, İnönü’s reform programme, designed to please the progressive members of the PRP, was never put into effect.⁴⁷

The gradual merging of the minor parties with the JP and PRP led to attempts to preserve them. In April 1964, a bill was passed extending the system of proportional representation, used for elections to the Assembly, to the senate elections. However, when these were held in June 1964 the minor parties’ share of the vote showed an even further decline, to the benefit of the two major parties. Fol- lowing this, the new Electoral Law of 12 February 1965, which introduced the “national remainder” system, whereby unallocated seats were to be distributed to the parties according to their share of the vote not used in the election of successful candidates.⁴⁸

During the period of this coalition, the left wing of the PRP became more active, with İnönü’s reformist programme being an ack-

47 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 263-285, 287-328.

48 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Ahmad, Demokrasi Sürecinde Türkiye, p. 263-285, 287-328.

(26)

nowledgement of its growing influence. At the PRP’s General Cong- ress in October 1964, a number of the more left-wing members of the party, who favoured a more radical attitude on social welfare and trade unionism, and a more thorough revision of the party’s basic principles than those that had been proposed in 1959, were elected to the Party Assembly and Central Executive. The JP took advantage of this shift to the left in the PRP to increase its popular support among moderate and conservative elements in Turkey, by accusing the PRP of socialism and irreligion. The JP improved its own image considerably in November 1964 when it replaced the extremist, Saadettin Bil- giç, who had assumed temporary leadership of the party the previous June, on the death of Gümüşpala, with a political moderate, Süleyman Demirel. This change was welcomed by the military and sections of the intelligentsia as a repudiation of the anti-militarist and reactionary wing of the JP, though they were still suspicious of the party. The struggle for power between Bilgiç and Demirel continued, however, after the change of leadership. Although support for each was fairly evenly balanced within the party Demirel established his control when the JP led other opposition parties in a “National Opposition” on 13 February 1965 which defeated the İnönü Government by rejecting the budget law.⁴⁹

8. The Justice Party Governments (1965-1971)

8.1. Prelude to Power, Coalition of the JP, NTP, RPNP and NP, (February-October 1965) and the elections of October 1965

A new coalition Government consisting of the JP, the NTP, the RPNP and the NP was formed in February 1965 under the leadership of Suat Hayri Ürgüplü, who had been elected as an Independent, with Demirel as Deputy Leader. The JP dominated the coalition, although its relations with the RPNP and, more particularly, the NP were often difficult owing to the minor parties’ unwillingness to co-operate. The

49 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973.

(27)

eight-month rule of the coalition Government was overshadowed by the prospect of a general election which had to be held by the autumn of 1965. Although an ambitious reform programme similar to that of İnönü’s third coalition was adopted, little was accomplished.⁵⁰

The campaign for the general election was fought largely between the PRP and JP. This time, the focus was on social and economic ques- tions, unlike the 1961 elections which had been concerned principally with attitudes to the 1961 Revolution. Before the election, the PRP revised its programme and on 29 July, İnönü announced that it was a

“left-of-centre” party. This shift to the left, which was fully exploited by the JP, in fact cost the PRP considerable votes in the election on 10 October 1965, which resulted in a comfortable JP majority in the Se- nate and Assembly and enabled the party to form a Government on its own under Demirel’s leadership. Proportional representation en- sured that the JP did not obtain the large parliamentary majorities of the DP in the 1950s, and, contrary to expectations, failed to assist the minor parties. Small right-wing parties such as the NTP and RPNP declined even further. Alpaslan Türkeş, who became the RPNP’s chairman on 31 July 1965, changed the party into a strongly anti-Com- munist national socialist party, which resulted in the defection to the JP of many of its members. The TLP, however, improved its position by attracting left-wing members and voters from the PRP.⁵¹

8.2. The first Justice Party Government (October 1965 - October 1969); internal divisions within the JP, PRP and TLP and the elections of October 1969

The 1965 elections in effect established a two-party system, although neither of the two major parties was completely united. In the JP there was dissension between moderates and right-wing extremists, and in the PRP between moderates and left-wing extremists. The

50 (TNA) FCO51/290/RR5/9, “The Development of Political Parties in Turkey”, 14 August 1973. Akşin, Türkiye Tarihi 4, p. 215-224.

(28)

Prime Minister, Süleyman Demirel, did not include Bilgiç or other JP right-wing extremists in his first cabinet, although he did incline towards their policies in his programme, which shelved land and tax reform and proposed the de-nationalisation of some industries. The extremists lost further ground at the JP General Congress of Novem- ber 1966, when most of the seats on the executive and control of the parliamentary group were won by the moderates. However, fearing that the extremists might answer RPNP advances and leave the JP, Demirel included Bilgiç in his cabinet on 1 April 1967. The strength of the right-wing increased further at local elections in June 1968, when the party in general lost ground. At the JP Congress of Novem- ber 1968, the right-wing regained control of the parliamentary group.

The moderates, however, retained control of the executive, and De- mirel was comfortably re-elected Chairman, but Bilgiç’s group later embarrassed the Government by passing a motion at the same meeting calling for the full restoration of the political rights of former De- mocrats. They had been released from jail, but the Government had not insisted on a full amnesty because of opposition from the military.⁵²

The shift to the left in the PRP aggravated internal differences of opinion in the party. Left-wing control over the party organisation grew steadily. It won all the seats on the executive at the party’s Ge- neral Congress of October 1966 and its leader, Bülent Ecevit, was elected Secretary General. Kasım Gülek, who opposed the left-of-centre policy, finally challenged Inönü for the chairmanship. He was, however, defeated, and he resigned from the party in 1967. Despite assurances to the contrary by the party leaders, many of the less radical members of the PRP equated the left-of-centre policy with socialism, and even went so far as to support the JP against their own party on occasions. The conflict in the PRP reached a head in April 1967 when an Extraordinary Congress, held to resolve the dispute, ended

(29)

in the condemnation of the right-wing. As a result, forty-eight deputies and senators left the party, and on 12 May 1967 founded the Re- liance Party (RP) under the leadership of Professor Turhan Feyzioğlu.

New vacancies in the PRP structure were filled by Ecevit’s supporters, and his position was further strengthened in June when two more left- wingers were elected to the party executive. The PRP Congress in Oc- tober 1968 confirmed Ecevit’s ascent and the decline in the status of traditionally senior members of the party, such as Erim and Kemal Satır.⁵³

After the 1965 elections the TLP, which had previously succeeded in attracting some left-wing support away from the PRP, was gradually split by conflicts between its own groups: the intellectuals, the trade unionists and the “authentic” revolutionaries, i.e. those who claimed to have started the leftist movement in 1946. The finally divisive issue for the TLP was the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, in Au- gust 1968, which was supported by the party’s Marxist intellectuals but not by more moderate members of the party.⁵⁴

During the JP’s first term of office (1965-69), its electoral support at interim elections remained steady. The PRP’s move to the left contributed to this, as did measures such as the Electoral Law of 1 March 1968, which abolished the “national remainder” voting system, which had been introduced in 1965 to assist the minor parties. With the elections approaching, a crisis arose over the position of the former De- mocrats. On 9 May 1969, in a surprising tactical move, the PRP rever- sed its policy and gave support to the demand of the JP Congress of November 1968 for a full restoration of the Democrats’ political rights.

A bill to this effect was passed by the Assembly on 14 May; however, Demirel, faced with direct opposition from the Armed Forces, persu-

(30)

aded reluctant JP Senators to shelve the bill. On his initiative, Parlia- ment then went into an early recess until after the General Elections of October. The PRP opposed this decision and called for an emer- gency session to deal with outstanding parliamentary business, but to no avail. It attacked the Government over the rising cost of living and the growing balance of payments deficit. The JP countered by poin- ting to the high growth rate and to its provision of basic services to the villages, from where it got most of its support..⁵⁵

8.3. The Second Justice Party Government (October 1969 - March 1971); the continuation of internal divisions in the PRP and JP

JP returned to office after the general election of 12 October 1969, although their share of the vote had dropped considerably. The PRP kept its share despite the split of 1967 and the formation of the Reli- ance Party. It had gained at the TLP’s expense, but lost some of its support to the new Unity Party. The extreme left and right were left with next to no parliamentary representation. Of the six minor parties, only the Reliance Party won enough votes to form parliamentary groups.⁵⁶ The 1969 elections confirmed Turkey’s two-party system with the JP and PRP accounting for 74% of the popular vote, and 88.7% of the 450 parliamentary seats.⁵⁷ The deep rifts within the two parties, however, continued.

At a meeting of the PRP Party Assembly⁵⁸ following the elections, Nihat Erim, a prominent conservative member of the party, accused

56 The political parties’ law of July 1965 stipulates that 10 members are required in the Grand National Assembly to form a GNA party group. Those parties with at least 10 members in the Senate may form a Senate party group, while those with 10 members in the whole National Assembly set up a National Assembly Party Group.

58 The PRP Party Assembly or Council consists of about forty members selected by the General Congress. The Party Assembly has more responsibility in determining policy, although the General Congress has been described as “the party’s highest authority”.

(31)

Ecevit of mishandling the election campaign and exerting his personal control over the party.⁵⁹ He was unexpectedly supported by the extreme left-wing of the party who were also critical of Ecevit’s leadership, and regarded the party’s new policy over the former Democ- rats as a betrayal of the 1960 Revolution. At this point, it must be noted that the Bill restoring the Democrats’ political rights had been passed without difficulty on 6 November 1969, but annulled by the Constitu- tional Court on 16 June 1970, in response to an appeal by the TLP.

However, at the end of the meeting, four right-wing members of the Executive resigned and were replaced by pro-Ecevit members. A com- muniqué was issued which, without naming names, in effect condem- ned both Erim and the conservatives and the extreme left-wingers who had supported him. The rift between Erim and Ecevit arose again at the party’s Congress between 3 and 5 July 1970. Re-elected as Cha- irman, İnönü tried to reconcile the two factions, albeit unsuccessfully.⁶⁰

With the JP, internal divisions during the second JP Government culminated in a split in the party. Demirel excluded Bilgiç and the right-wing from his new cabinet. They retaliated on 11 February 1970 by defeating the budget. Demirel resigned, but at President Sunay’s request resumed office, with the same cabinet, and with the sworn support of the majority of JP Deputies. Thirty-five of the rebels were suspended in March 1970 for varying periods, and on 25 June 1970, 26 of them, including Bilgiç, were expelled. However, this did not solve the Government’s problems. Charges of corruption, serious economic difficulties and extremist violence in the country soon followed. Although it seemed at the JP Congress between 21 and 23 October 1970 that the party was united in their support of Demirel,

The functions of the General Congress are to discuss and decide on national and party affairs only, within the framework of the party’s policies. The JP is similarly structu- red.

(32)

he still met with opposition. This was especially from Ferruh Bozbeyli, a founder member of the party, who resigned from the party on 13 November 1970; and from Professor Aydın Yalçın, a leader of the

“sworn” deputies, who had opposed Demirel for the Chairmanship of the Party. Demirel had lost so much support in the JP and in the Assembly that the election of Speakers for the Senate and the National Assembly continued throughout the whole of November 1970. When a JP Senator resigned on 8 December, the JP lost the absolute majority it had had in the Senate since the June 1966 elections. On 18 December 1970, a group of from the right-wing of the party left to form the Democratic Party. They supported a mixed economy, emphasising private enterprise and the opposition to land reform. It became the third largest parliamentary party, replacing the Reliance Party.⁶¹

Although it could have been expected for the minor parties to take the opportunity to assert themselves, the PP, NTP and NP’s intention to merge announced on 17 October 1970 did not materialise. Some top officials of the NTP joined the RP, which changed its name to the National Reliance Party (NRP) in January 1971.⁶²

9. “Above-party” Governments (March 1971-April 1973); the split in the PRP and the formation of the Republican Reliance Party

On 12 March 1971, the Armed Forces Commanders issued a memorandum in which they threatened to take direct control of the country unless a new “above-party” Government was formed to restore law and order, and execute the reforms demanded in the 1961 Cons- titution that were aimed to bring the country back in line with the policies and ideals of Atatürk. Consequently, Demirel resigned. The next two years witnessed three successive administrations struggling

(33)

to meet the Army’s demands under a regime of “guided democracy”.

Public order was restored, but this was only possible with an extended period of martial law in eleven important provinces, and measures to curtail free speech and increase government control over universities, broadcasting and the press. There was also circumstantial evidence of torture of political prisoners.⁶³

The first “above-party” Government was formed under the leadership of Nihat Erim, who resigned from the PRP, and included

“technocrat” Ministers from outside Parliament. A serious split ensued in the PRP. İnönü and most of the conservatives supporting Erim and Ecevit refusing to co-operate with his former opponent. He resigned as PRP Secretary-General, claiming that Erim’s appointment was designed to thwart the election of a PRP Government with radical left- of-centre policies. With the exception of a few dissidents who thought that Demirel should not have resigned, the JP agreed to support the new Government. However, it was the JP that was largely responsible for the collapse of Erim’s first administration when it refused to support the reforms demanded by the Army, with the exception of those designed to strengthen the executive. Erim was forced to compromise on the reform programme, and this hastened the resignation on 3 De- cember 1971 of the radical “technocrat” Ministers. Erim formed a new Government on 11 December 1971, this time including more Parlia- mentarians. However, with a parliamentary majority, the JP was able to block any proposals it did not favour. Consequently, on 3 April 1972 President Sunay proposed that the Government be empowered to rule by decree. This proposal was rejected by the parties, and the De- mocratic Party moved a vote of censure on Erim. Although the other parties refused to consider this, Erim resigned on 17 April 1972.⁶⁴